The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the original court’s imprisonment (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The ex officio determination prosecutor changed the name of the defendant from "Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes" to "Habitual larceny", and applied for changes to "Article 5-4(6) and (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes" and "Articles 32, 329, and 35 of the Criminal Act" respectively, and the court granted permission.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below against the defendant became unable to be maintained as it is due to changes in the subject.

3. If so, without examining the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing, the lower judgment is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing, and the following is again decided after pleading

Criminal facts

The summary of the evidence and the facts charged against the defendant recognized by the court and the summary of the evidence are the same as the stated in each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below. Thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Articles of the Criminal Act and Articles 332 and 329 of the Criminal Act concerning the crimes;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 11 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for the mitigation of deaf-mutes is that the defendant committed the crime of this case under the manual similar to the previous one because he did not have been sentenced several times for larcenys even though he had been sentenced to punishment, and the execution of the final sentence has not been completed, and that the victim's damage has not been recovered, etc. are considered to be a condition for sentencing unfavorable to the defendant. On the other hand, the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflects the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case, and that the defendant's profit derived from the crime of this case does not seem to be large, the defendant is deaf, the crime of this case itself is limited to one time, and the defendant's family environment is weak